“I am relieved that today we have been able to conclude this tribunal case. It has been an extremely difficult and distressing time for me and my family and I now look forward to moving forward with my life.

“My priority has always been the health and safety of the players and fulfilling my duty of care as a doctor. In running onto the pitch to treat a player, who requested medical attention, I was following the rules of the game and fulfilling my medical responsibilities.

“I would like to thank everyone who has supported me including my husband, family and friends and members of the football community.”

Share this:

LONDON (AP) Jose Mourinho could face questions at an employment tribunal about his treatment of a club doctor while he worked at Chelsea.

Eva Carneiro is claiming constructive dismissal by Chelsea, separate from her legal action against Mourinho. The Portuguese coach was fired by the club in December, four months after his public outburst against the medical staff.

Share this:

Surely Jose Mourinho and Chelsea would do just about anything to make the Dr. Eva Carneiro scandal go away..

Mourinho made headlines after Opening Day when he criticized the respected Chelsea team physician for going onto the field to tend to Eden Hazard, ensuring the Blues would play with nine men for a short period of time.

And as time went on, the issue gained notoriety. First, Mourinho removed her from the match day team. Then, claims that he verbally-abused her in sexist fashion came out, before Dr. Carneiro quit her post with Chelsea.

Finally, threats of legal action came, and Dr. Carneiro broke her lengthy silence on Friday with a statement that was met with vigorous disapproval from the Football Association.

“I was surprised to learn that the FA was allegedly investigating the incident of 8th of August via the press. I was at no stage requested by the FA to make a statement. I wonder whether this might be the only formal investigation in this country where the evidence of the individuals involved in the incident was not considered relevant. Choosing to ignore some of the evidence will surely influence the outcome of the findings.

“Last season I had a similar experience at a game at West Ham FC, where I was subject to verbal abuse. Following complaints by the public, the FA produced a communication to the press saying there had been no sexist chanting during this game. At no time was I approached for a statement despite the fact that vile unacceptable, sexually explicit abuse was clearly heard.

“It is incidents such as these and the lack of support from the football authorities that make it so difficult for women in the game.”

“We have never received any information or complaint from Dr Carneiro. Including in written correspondence with her lawyers, it has been made explicitly clear that if Dr Carneiro had evidence to provide or wished to make a complaint she was more than welcome to do so. That route remains open.”

This is trickier than it seems. Verbal accounts have to be verified, and Dr. Carneiro would need someone on the Chelsea staff to have heard Mourinho, and be willing to likely lose their job by speaking up.

On the other hand, if Dr. Carneiro hasn’t filed a complaint, well, why not? Has she been cautioned not to? Is it a matter of principle? Something nefarious from either end?

There are a lot of questions here, and it seemingly gets murkier by the day. If the story as we “know” it is true, then Carneiro has been treated very poorly by Chelsea and Mourinho. Whether the “football authorities” have been an obstacle instead of a help to a female or a physician — let alone a female physician — myriad other questions are in play.